Many organizations are promoting and developing universal RFID devices such as tags, interrogators and transponders. Some organizations aim to provide RFID devices with a universal access protocol at a minimal cost (e.g., about five cents). Low production cost and universal access would ensure the wide-spread usage of the RFID devices. One of the possible benefits of such RFID devices is the ability to track belongings. A manufacturer, at the request of a merchant, could install RFID devices in its products, (e.g., key chains, remote controls, wallets, etc.)
One of the existing concerns of such universal RFID devices is that they may allow tracking an individual without his knowledge by tracking his possessions having embedded RFID devices. A possible solution to this privacy concern is an implementation of a “kill command” allowing the individual to disable the RFID device. This solution is short-sighted since it destroys the value and the purpose of the RFID device. If one disables the RFID device, the individual can no longer track his belongings. Conversely, if one does not disable the RFTD device, he is at risk of being tracked himself. Some argue that there are no repercussions upon the individual: either he chooses to use the RFID device or he disables it. The basis for that argument is that an individual does not have to pay directly for the RFID device. Therefore, there is no need for a system that allows the individual to use the RFTD system without jeopardizing one's privacy. Such an argument has little merit since the merchants and manufacturers transfer the cost of producing RFID devices to the individual by including its cost in the retail price. Thus, it is in the individual's interest to be able to utilize the RFID system while safeguarding his privacy.
Another concern is that the RFID system would allow anyone to access the information stored in the RFID devices. For example, an unauthorized person may traverse through a store with the RFID device that issues “kill commands” to the RFID devices embedded in the merchandise and neutralize them before the merchandise is checked out of the store. Furthermore, once the “kill command” has been issued it destroys the usefulness of the RFID device since it is no longer able to transmit signals.
Another example involves an individual working for a competitor who might perform an inventory check of the store. A proposed solution to this problem is the installation of the RFID interrogators throughout the store. The RFID interrogators would detect unauthorized RFID communications and alert security forces. This system is inconvenient and cumbersome since it relies on an ubiquity of interrogators within the store which is a very costly investment. In addition, the use of security forces in locating the unauthorized persons is a time-consuming and costly endeavor.